Word: argumentative
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...Crimson's staff editorial, "Eliminate the Abortion Refund" (Editorial, April 13) is a masterpiece of muddled thinking and deceptive rhetoric. The editors claim to recognize the "strong moral objections to abortion," but then proceed to the dubious argument that such objections must take a back seat to the decisions of the nebulous "experts" who allocate UHS funding. These experts are apparently infallible, since we are informed, without evidence, that their decisions cannot be subjected to an "external moral, political, or religious debate." For The Crimson, apparently, ethics have a place in the sweatshop debate, but must never be applied...
...editors then proceed to equate opposition to abortion with the beliefs of Christian Scientists and Jehovah's Witnesses concerning the morality of receiving medical care. This argument obscures the fact that for pro-lifers, abortion is not merely a private sin (as, say, eating meat on Fridays in Lent is for Catholics) but a public crime: the deliberate taking of human life. And opposition to abortion is not a peculiar tenet of a single Denomination--rather, it is common to nearly all orthodox western religions, ranging from Missouri Synod Lutheranism to Shi'ite and Sunni Islam, and from Russian Orthodoxy...
...cavalierly dismissing abortion as just another "medical procedure"--an unscientific and illogical canard of the pro-choice movement for decades--and capping their intolerant argument with a pat, predictable appeal to "diversity," the Crimson does a grave disservice both to intellectual rigor and to the journalistic standards that it claims to uphold...
According to the Wilmon D. Chipman, the arresting police officer, and his report, the student arrived at his girlfriend's dorm room early Thursday evening. After an argument in which the female student said she wanted to end their six-month relationship, her boyfriend allegedly told her, "I feel like I want to kill you and kill myself...
Microsoft says it bundles browsers and other applications to make Windows better. And it insists it must have the right to continue to innovate by adding any "functionalities" it wants. But Judge Jackson held that Microsoft was simply using this innovation argument--a "technological artifice"--in order to extend the Windows monopoly into an Internet browser monopoly. And that, he ruled, was illegal...